The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

For a period of three years, personal information of the defendant is provided to the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Part 1 of the case by the Defendant and the requester for the attachment order (the requester for the preliminary protective order; hereinafter “Defendant”) were under the influence of alcohol at the time of each crime as indicated in the judgment, which lacks the ability to discern things or make decisions.

2) The sentencing of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

3) Although there are special circumstances under which disclosure order of personal information disclosure should not be disclosed to the public, it is unreasonable for the court below to order the disclosure order of personal information of the defendant for a period of three years.

B. The defendant is likely to recommit a sexual crime on the part of the request for attachment order

Although it is difficult to see that the court below ordered the defendant to attach a location tracking device for three years.

2. Judgment on the grounds for appeal

A. On the grounds of appeal for mental and physical weakness, comprehensively considering the various circumstances acknowledged by evidence, such as the type and quantity of drinking alcohol, the background leading to the crime, the defendant's behavior before and after the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, the defendant did not have the ability to discern things or make decisions due to drinking.

The decision is judged.

The defendant's ground of appeal on this part cannot be accepted.

B. The lower court determined that the Defendant’s crime of indecent act by compulsion of the instant forced crime does not themselves constitute a specific violent crime under Article 2(1)3 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment of Specific Cggravated Crimes (hereinafter “Special Cases Concerning the Punishment of Aggravated Crimes”), but the Defendant was sentenced two or more times to a crime under the former part of Article 2(1)4 of the Specific Cggravated Crimes Act, and thus, the lower court determined that the crime of indecent act by compulsion of the instant forced crime committed by such Defendant constituted a specific violent crime under the latter part of Article 2(1)4 of the Cggravated Punishment Act.

Accordingly, the court below held.